87
Not only that, I am certain Google will put as much money as needed into it not to allow any competing platform.
YT is not profitable, but gives them data, power and control.
Blink twice if someone is holding you hostage.
Yeah, and he is not pretending. He is taking publicly about price for him to show up in music video. I can imagine this is probably similar, someone payed him to use his name on dog products. He got some money and doesn't care.
They are not PR people, don't expected that of just normal people having fun. No one is promising "chrome killer coming in six months".
Thig is that for SerenityOS they want to make everything from scratch, ssh, ssl, libraries, utils, text editor... even the browser. They could have just porr Firefox, but that was not the point. To use it you had to complile whole OS.
But since browser got some attention and sone complex sites (like guthub and twitter) started working in it, to make project more viable they are dropping this constraint for browser. I guess they migt use some gui library, ssl lib, codecs... stuff like that. But, I expect, they will not use others code for rendering engine and js, but continue with implementation from documentation.
While some in this thread say they are racist, homophobic and stuff. Maybe some are maybe just not polished for public speak, do we really think everyone in google is totally clean?
I almost looks like your "democrats" are not actually democrats...
It actually exists and is being developed for the last three yeras. But you have to compile it by youself. Just a way to prevent people from having expectations, but a lot of modern sites are working in it. Some errors, a bit slow, but they have rendering engine, css parser, js implementation and are working closely with w3c - they have found some bugs in the standard since they are implementing it directly.
Great and useful project, I don't know if it will become real competition to firefox and chrome, but I guess it will get traction. A lot of people want new browser, some of them have money.
I always wondered why they haven't been doing it from the start, seams like it is not as simple as I imagine.
People will take it, there is no other option and G is working hard not to allow another video platform.
Problem is ads they are playing are awful and loud. We will make way to silent them and black them out, it is not hard.
Bigger problem is content they are pushing is getting bad and is pushing creators into burnout. And I don't want to see videos companies are creating, but want individual contributions.
I just need it to mute and unmute it. Maybe also put black mask over video.
This is news from September and linked blog post from December. Nothing happened.
It still costs money for hardware and hosting. Scraping web and training AI ain't cheap.
There are parts of the world not EU and US. They would all benefit from cheap panels.
But EU and US are not really important: https://www.statista.com/statistics/668749/regional-distribution-of-solar-pv-module-manufacturing/ they account only for few percent of solar photovoltaic module production.
view more: next ›
monobot
joined 3 years ago
I don't have solution for videos, but I am moving back to podcasts and rss as much as possible. I want to be ready when they finally forbbid watching without ads.
But I must admit content creators are not helping, content for most of them become just job to be done with. I am aware it is not their fault and that yt is pushing them, but content is geting worse.
It is hard to compete with platform that is loosing so much money. They will also buy anyone who tries. Maybe if we start being satisfied with one resolution and quality, but that will never happen.